I think that they made a good buisness decision. They are most likely almost at the peak of their subscription base. If they get out now and lose a large amoont of their customers then they may be able to recover and who knows? Maybe they can turn over a profit...
These games are some of the best I have seen. They so completely non-linear in their gameplay that they should be commended in some way beyond other games. The only trouble with these games is the fact that four hours never fails to seems to seem like one, and that can be a very, very big problem...
A company can't simply exempt themselves from a resonablity. If I were to lend you a pencil after having you agree to a lengthy contract stating that all you write with that pencil unconditionally belongs to me than that would no longer be reasonable. The same holds true with the ISP.
The games themselves cost around 50 to 70 dollars (more than a fair price for the months to years of development.) However, do you really think that the person who spends a few weeks gathering 1000 gold in a game deserves twice that amount?
This is ridiculous. These people have spent the time to obtain the rankings and items which means they should be allowed to sell them. What they are selling is what they have created. If someone decides to type a book in Word they should be allowed to sell that book at their will.
ow would testing be employed for something like this? No one has the large scale servers to use it with and I really don't think that anyone has 900,000 web pages saved locally either. Also, it would most likely have to be compatible with Google's current software (it could run separately, but the data collected would do no good if the Google machines can't interpret it.) Any thoughts on this?
Look at it this way; I think that TV advertisements work because if you happen to be watching commercials what are you thinking about? The commercials. Even in movies the product placement is mostly in the boring scenes that is comprised of "chit-chat" that no one really pays much attention to anyway, so they may notice the product. In video games however you are only concentrating on the game. How many times have you been playing an intense racing game only to notice a banner so amazing that you slam into a wall? Never.
I don't see a problem with this practice at all, and in my opinion I think that software companies should be accepting revenue for product placement, as $20,000 here and there could help to lower the price of the product.
http://w3.one.net/~johnb/imaclinux/ has the same pictures one a fast server (at least at the moment it's fast.) Just thought I would share that with those trying to see the large photos.
I would bargin to say that by the time Google recovers from the overall cost of buying this than hard drives will have advanced to the point where they are on par with today's current ram...
Slashdot Mirror
I think that they made a good buisness decision. They are most likely almost at the peak of their subscription base. If they get out now and lose a large amoont of their customers then they may be able to recover and who knows? Maybe they can turn over a profit...
Sorry about that, I accidently put that up. I just changed it back
Ok, took it down. No longer up.
Then I am hosting the same page here: http://65.35.12.207:8080
These games are some of the best I have seen. They so completely non-linear in their gameplay that they should be commended in some way beyond other games. The only trouble with these games is the fact that four hours never fails to seems to seem like one, and that can be a very, very big problem...
This would be news if the device actually still ran after melting. "The indestructable Palm Pilots..."
A company can't simply exempt themselves from a resonablity. If I were to lend you a pencil after having you agree to a lengthy contract stating that all you write with that pencil unconditionally belongs to me than that would no longer be reasonable. The same holds true with the ISP.
The games themselves cost around 50 to 70 dollars (more than a fair price for the months to years of development.) However, do you really think that the person who spends a few weeks gathering 1000 gold in a game deserves twice that amount?
This is ridiculous. These people have spent the time to obtain the rankings and items which means they should be allowed to sell them. What they are selling is what they have created. If someone decides to type a book in Word they should be allowed to sell that book at their will.
ow would testing be employed for something like this? No one has the large scale servers to use it with and I really don't think that anyone has 900,000 web pages saved locally either. Also, it would most likely have to be compatible with Google's current software (it could run separately, but the data collected would do no good if the Google machines can't interpret it.) Any thoughts on this?
Look at it this way; I think that TV advertisements work because if you happen to be watching commercials what are you thinking about? The commercials. Even in movies the product placement is mostly in the boring scenes that is comprised of "chit-chat" that no one really pays much attention to anyway, so they may notice the product. In video games however you are only concentrating on the game. How many times have you been playing an intense racing game only to notice a banner so amazing that you slam into a wall? Never.
I don't see a problem with this practice at all, and in my opinion I think that software companies should be accepting revenue for product placement, as $20,000 here and there could help to lower the price of the product.
http://w3.one.net/~johnb/imaclinux/ has the same pictures one a fast server (at least at the moment it's fast.) Just thought I would share that with those trying to see the large photos.
I would bargin to say that by the time Google recovers from the overall cost of buying this than hard drives will have advanced to the point where they are on par with today's current ram...